jason

Agreed. This draft is absolutely loaded with premiere OL talent. It can't be screwed up this year. Wait too long at your own peril. Adding a TE, WR, or LB in the first would be a huge mistake when there is a virtual guarantee that either Johnson, Cooper, or Fluker will be available when the Bears select.

Never feel bad for a guy who's getting an average of the top players at his position and he's getting paid millions upon millions to play a game.

Very interesting question.

Completely agreed. I believe the problem with DJ Moore's play this year is directly related to his playing time. Play-makers can't just turn it on every play. Play-makers need opportunity.

According to PFF. You say it like the statement is fact, when, it obviously is not. Otherwise people would be talking about Webb being as good as Bushrod, which, aside from you and Webb's momma, they aren't.

It isn't that they don't know how to use a stopwatch. It's that they make completely ridiculous stats like the one you posted. Think it through... West coast offense + 200 more passes than the Bears + Pistol formation integration + quicker release from QB = a much lower number in the "Time to Throw" category. It's a misleading stat for a variety of reasons. Even simple mathematics says their number would lessen with more snaps in a WCO. Find me the following three stats and then we can talk: 1) Time to throw when the QB takes a 3-step drop 2) Time to throw when the QB takes a 5-step drop 3) Time to throw when the QB takes a 7-step drop

Yes, that's the case. Out of necessity. Although, maximized might be a bad word considering how poorly the Bears offense did. The Bears simply didn't have a ton of deep drops because they had to make sure Cutler didn't get murdered. You probably couldn't look through the entire year's game film and find more than about 20 such plays (i.e. 7-step drops without pressure); I'd reckon. It simply wasn't possible because Cutler rarely had time to make a second read, much less drop back 7-steps. Brees, on the other hand, dropped back VERY frequently. It's not even difficult to find plays displaying this concept. Although, there is a bit of apples/oranges here because Brees often lined up in the pistol and then dropped back another 3 or 5 steps. Either way, he had a ridiculously greater amount of time in pocket than Cutler.

VERY good points. I am not inclined to do the research, but I'm willing to bet the percentage of 3/5/7-step drops for each team would point to more deep drops for the Saints (percentage-wise), and less for the Bears simply because the Bears could almost never actually execute a play requiring a 7-step drop.

I couldn't find Webb's penalty stats, and I wasn't about to crunch the numbers on when they happened. Bushrod either. As for the difference of opinion, it's only based on the fact that the Bears' offense and OL sucked, and the Saints offense and OL was great. That leads me to believe while the metrics used were close to the same, there were a far greater number of plays for the Bears that could be debated.

The reason you got murdered is because the statistics are far too simplistic for a variety of reasons, the first two of which are frequency and severity. The latter is not easy to quantify, but what constitutes a hurry, hit, or sack? The first two items are not as easily defined as going into the stat book for sacks and just summing the totals. Similarly, the severity of all three matters. Does the hurry come on 3rd and 8, in the 4th quarter, while the Bears are driving for the tie? Does the hit jar a pass, hurt the QB or otherwise make him tentative? Does the sack do the same? As for frequency, that's easy enough. Take the number of dropbacks for each team, divide each stat into that number. Add the percentages. Webb screws up 9.45% of the time. Bushrod is 8.66%. I'd say once you factor in severity, penalties (he's a leader in this department), and a difference of opinion on a variety of plays, Webb is probably closer to screwing up at least 15-20% of the time. Bushrod's number probably stays close to 10% or the Saints offense wouldn't have been nearly as prolific. Also, FYI, the Saints QBs dropped back 200+ more times than the Bears' QBs. If Cutler dropped back an extra 200 times last year we'd be spending the entire offseason talking about his recovery from surgery and whether the Bears need to reach for a QB in the first round.

In order of first round horribleness (if that's a word): 1) DT - Makes no sense at all now that Melton is tagged. Would get stuck in rotation. A rotational first rounder...how'd that work last year? 2) DB - Makes no sense at all considering the Pro-Bowlers on the roster. Would be a nickel at best. Rotational again. 3) WR - There are three starters on the team already. At best, this first rounder would be supplementary. First rounders are supposed to be impact players, not supplementary. 4) TE - There is a good chance the play-making TE is already on the roster.

Maybe he was vocal about it, and Lovie et. al. just straight up told him they prioritized OL last? I don't know if that happened, and doubt it did, but you never know.

Bingo. If I'm the QB, give me the pro-bowl OL and a bunch of average WRs. They'll get open eventually.

Did the Bears pay too much? I read this tidbit from Sun Times and have a bit of confusion within me: What was the actual cost of the Cutler trade with Denver? The Broncos drafted defensive end Robert Ayers with the Bears’ first-round pick in 2009 (18th overall). The 49ers acquired the 2010 first-round pick from the Broncos and drafted offensive tackle Anthony Davis with 11th overall pick. And the swap of third/fifth round picks turned into a trade of wide receivers — Mike Wallace (by the Steelers in the third round) for Johnny Knox (by the Bears in the fifth round). Trading for Cutler certainly changed the course of the franchise, and there is no guarantee those players would have been selected (especially by Lovie), but wouldn't it be nice to see Ayers across from Peppers, Davis mauling for Forte, and Wallace opposite Marshall? OF course, none of that probably would have happened the same way either, but it's just food for thought. I'm still a big Cutler fan, and believe he can deliver if he's ever given an OL.

Misleading thread title. My bad.

Oh. This would be atrocious. http://chicago.sbnation.com/2013/2/27/4037...ldon-richardson

How many damn years do you want this dude to improve and keeping getting chances?! He went from horrible to worst in the NFL to near the worst in the NFL. Big F'ing deal. Maybe if he incrementally improves for the next ten years he'll be a good player. I doubt it, but let's play hypothetical. Do the Bears sacrifice their QB, their offense, their team for that period of time? C'mon! I swear, you must be related to the guy.

The thing that bugs me about this line of thought: 1) You attempt to improve Webb's stock by talking about ways other people can help him. If he needs the help, then it's a personal fault of his. 2) You attempt to displace blame from Webb by stating the weaker LG next to him made Webb screw up. Let's be honest; it's not like Webb was completing his assignment and then diving in to help the LG. That simply was not happening. So it's a false line of reasoning. I can see if it was a pro-bowl type player who could occupy his guy real quick and then lend some of his incredible talent towards assisting a lesser teammate, but that's far from a description of Webb.

I'm just used the status quo of "no draftees"+"no FAs". So I try to think of ways that the OL will get better with the pieces on roster. In my ideal world we get rid of both of them...well, maybe Garza sticks around for a year to help train up a young player. I have said since the beginning that when Spencer was signed he should have played center. That was the reason he was signed after all. As a replacement for Kreutz. But then the switcheroo happened, Garza left his OG home, Spencer left his C home, and the went all Little Red Riding Hood on us.

I meant: "Chance with a second team in the NFL."

scs HA! I just realized your tagline. Hilarious. I don't think it's exactly related or as accurate as my tag line, but it's got merit to it.

I actually like the idea. First round talent for UDFA money? If given a second chance, he might surprise some people and change his ways. People are ready to give a guy like Webb tons of chances, even with recent stupidity, and he has only an inkling of the talent that Campbell has. And if he comes into camp lazy, way overweight, or is a problem in any way, cut his ass and dash all NFL dreams he will ever have. From what I've read, the dude understands that he F'd up big time.

Yeah, crazy thought. Put Garza at his best position and put Spencer at his best position, which also just happens to be the position for which he was picked up. Been saying this ever since Spencer was signed. Doubt it will happen.

This. Also, I've seen some of the SWAC talent up close and personal, and I'm not all that excited about a SWAC player in the 2nd round (not saying some don't excel). It reeks of a Lovie Smith draft. If he were a DT I would think Lovie made Lemon type it out like that.

Exactly how I feel about this.